Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>
> In the previous post, I said it was not the barycenter of Earth to
> Moon. So what is it
> in relation to Gravity = Positron Space? It is more like that of
> "tidal forces".
>
> If you look at the picture displayed above in Wikipedia, the Moon in
> gamma rays
> looks like a tidal effect view of the Moon.
>
> So that we can imagine all of the Moon being nothing but water and
> thus distended
> by the gravity pull of the Earth and in the distended ****tion is the
> Gravity = Positron Space
> where the antimatter materialization occurrs and subsequently collides
> and annihilates
> with ordinary matter.
>
> This can be checked with binary stars, in that the gamma rays would
> located at the distended
> surface of the stars.
>
> Perhaps we can also test this out on some of the satellites of Jupiter
> and Saturn in that the
> tidal forces should agree with gamma ray emissions.
>
> One would ask, "well why does not the Sun produce the most gamma rays
> on the Moon and
> Earth instead of the relative pull of Earth to Moon. And the answer I
> offer at this moment in
> time is that Gravity = Positron Space is a imbalance situation such as
> tidal forces due to gravity.
> In a balanced situation such as Sun to Earth, the balancing does not
> materialize antimatter out
> of the Positron-Space. In the Earth to Moon there is imbalance in
> gravity and that causes
> the Positron-Space to turn some space into antimatter particles. Once
> those antimatter
> particles are released and subsequently encounter nearby matter
> particles, an annihilation
> takes place and thus we see the Moon as very bright in gamma rays.
>
> Now my above scenario of events is very much counter to the
> explanation given in the
> Wikipedia photo of the Moon in gamma ray.
>
> P.S. By the way, I believe there was recent news from the BBC that
> they sent up a new satellite
> which is going to mapp gamma rays, since the Compton gamma ray
> observatory stopped
> in year 2000 or thereabouts.
>
--- quoting from Wikipedia on gamma rays ---
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_ray
Image of entire sky in 100 MeV or greater gamma rays as seen by the
EGRET instrument aboard the CGRO spacecraft. Bright spots within the
galactic plane are pulsars while those above and below the plane are
thought to be quasars.
--- end quoting ---
The above picture sup****ts the Gravity = Positron Space theory more
than it sup****ts
Big Bang with black-hole theory. If one had no knowledge of what that
picture looks like
and only armed with the ideas of Big Bang and black-holes, one would
not end up with a
picture of black-holes numerous in the Milky Way and then almost rare
beyond the
Milky Way. If Big Bang and black-holes were true, then their
distribution of black-holes
would be uniform and rare in our Milky Way, but the actual picture
shows the opposite.
Now I think I have a better mechanism for what causes the pulsing in
pulsars. With Gravity
= Positron Space then an imbalance in gravity of a astro body such as
the Moon with tidal
forces on Earth, causes a materialization of the Positron Space to
materialize antimatter which
very quickly encounters ordinary matter and thus annihilation and
resultant gamma rays or
X-rays ensue. So this scenario would say that most pulsars are
probably binary stars
with imbalance in their orbits.
Now tidal waves on Earth are very much periodical, as the waves of
water are very much
with a steady periodicity, much like the pulsing of pulsars. Only
stars would have gaseous
waves and not water waves. But waves are not even needed for pulsars,
for all that is
needed is a constant steady imbalance that creates antimatter and
which bumps into
ordinary matter and we see it as a pulsing pulsar. And the frequency
of tidal forces between
stars in the Milky Way would account for such a dense picture as shown
by the EGRET
instruments.
Now does this new mechanism of gamma rays provide better answers for
quasars? Indeed,
for quasars are so far away yet so intense in energy. The Quasar belt
would be dense because
they are galaxies closest to the Nucleus of the Atom Totality of
231Pu. But the density of
galaxies still does not explain the huge gamma ray emissions of
quasars. But since they
are so dense creates the op****tunity of very many imbalances of
gravity and those imbalances
create tidal forces which creates the Positron Space to spew out more
antimatter.
So, not only does the Gravity = Positron Space offer a better
mechanism for pulsars and
quasars and the Moon being the brightest gamma emitter to Earth, but
that the theory
fits the data of the pictures cited.
Now in the 1990s there was fear that microsecond pulsars would be
found, or something
close to microseconds. I have not kept pace with research of
microsecond pulsars whether
found or not found. But with this new theory that pulsars are gravity
tidal forces creating
antimatter annihilations, then the question becomes, can we have
microsecond pulsars? For
that question turns into the question of can you have tides of
microsecond tidal waves?
And the answer would be yes, for there is no lower limit to tidal
waves.
P.S. I can see that this is going to have to be another book in
astronomy for I have found a
mechanism that better explains the data and replaces black-holes and
chucks black-holes
out of physics altogther and good riddance to that pack of nonsense.
Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
|
